Absolutely.
The clueless wonders who keep spouting this Coulson/Vision nonsense have absolutely no knowledge of nor respect for Vision's actual origins. If you take away Ultron as his creator, you take away the dramatic heart of Vision's story; and if you take Ultron's origin away from Hank Pym, you take away the heart of *its* Oedipus complex story.

The Pym mythos needs to develop in Edgar Wright's Ant-Man film, period. Hank; Janet; Scott; Ultron; Vision; Jocasta. No way in hell should *any* of those characters appear before Ant-Man's release, except maybe as a cameo intro in Avengers 2.

Absolutely.
The clueless wonders who keep spouting this Coulson/Vision nonsense have absolutely no knowledge of nor respect for Vision's actual origins. If you take away Ultron as his creator, you take away the dramatic heart of Vision's story; and if you take Ultron's origin away from Hank Pym, you take away the heart of *its* Oedipus complex story.

The Pym mythos needs to develop in Edgar Wright's Ant-Man film, period. Hank; Janet; Scott; Ultron; Vision; Jocasta. No way in hell should *any* of those characters appear before Ant-Man's release, except maybe as a cameo intro in Avengers 2.

what if ant-man is a prequel? Like, say current MCU exists with Ultron before he goes full on bad, phase 2, he is built up and the villain. Then Ant-man is the origin story of the pym, and the origin of Ultron. Certainly would tie into fiege's comments, elements folding into phase 2 and 3

Absolutely.
The clueless wonders who keep spouting this Coulson/Vision nonsense have absolutely no knowledge of nor respect for Vision's actual origins. If you take away Ultron as his creator, you take away the dramatic heart of Vision's story; and if you take Ultron's origin away from Hank Pym, you take away the heart of *its* Oedipus complex story.

May be possible to alter Ultron's origin and make Tony Stark be his creator instead, it could start out as a presence, like the arm that Tony has in his lab, and then progress into a robot that the Avengers have to deal with. I know that Pym was the inventor of the AI and Ultron eventually kept making new versions of itself until it became a villain.

Still, it wouldn't be the end of the world to tweak Ultron's introduction.

what if ant-man is a prequel? Like, say current MCU exists with Ultron before he goes full on bad, phase 2, he is built up and the villain. Then Ant-man is the origin story of the pym, and the origin of Ultron. Certainly would tie into fiege's comments, elements folding into phase 2 and 3

CATFA is the only Marvel Studios movie that is a chronological prequel, and that was out of necessity. I strongly doubt Marvel has the need nor desire to do that again. Trying to bounce a Hank Pym/Ultron/Vision story back and forth between past and present over multiple movies would be needlessly confusing.

CATFA is the only Marvel Studios movie that is a chronological prequel, and that was out of necessity. I strongly doubt Marvel has the need nor desire to do that again. Trying to bounce a Hank Pym/Ultron/Vision story back and forth between past and present over multiple movies would be needlessly confusing.

True, but it may not though. Especially if an Ultron story concludes in avengers 2. He already exists by the time IM3 starts, and it just so happens that he starts to become more self aware/sentient. He evolves, and becomes the villain in avengers 2. Then, if Ant-man takes place in the past (wasn't it rumored to do so?) It would probably cover a bit of Ultron's origin at some point. I don't think it would be THAT confusing

True, but it may not though. Especially if an Ultron story concludes in avengers 2. He already exists by the time IM3 starts, and it just so happens that he starts to become more self aware/sentient. He evolves, and becomes the villain in avengers 2. Then, if Ant-man takes place in the past (wasn't it rumored to do so?) It would probably cover a bit of Ultron's origin at some point. I don't think it would be THAT confusing

Sure it would. And you're talking about approaching the story in reverse order, a strategy that is guaranteed to fail. A robot that supposedly *already* exists (even though there's been exactly zero hint of it in any of the current Marvel films), even before IM3 releases this year; becomes the Big Bad in Avengers 2; and then you go back and cover its origin story in Ant-Man --- after it's already been defeated/concluded in the Avengers sequel....? Who's going to give two ****s about seeing the origin story of a villain that's already dead?

Sure it would. And you're talking about approaching the story in reverse order, a strategy that is guaranteed to fail. A robot that supposedly *already* exists (even though there's been exactly zero hint of it in any of the current Marvel films), even before IM3 releases this year; becomes the Big Bad in Avengers 2; and then you go back and cover its origin story in Ant-Man --- after it's already been defeated/concluded in the Avengers sequel....? Who's going to give two ****s about seeing the origin story of a villain that's already dead?

I agree,......buuutttt, as we all know, Ultron is never 'truly' dead. He always has contingency plans to ensure his survival.
One of his groovier traits!

Sure. But that's not the point. The point is that Ultron's origin is incredibly essential to his status as a villain. To skip over that and make him the Avengers 2 villain makes him less compelling, and then to revisit it in a prequel-ish Ant-Man seems like an afterthought. Prequels can work when part of the intrigue of the villain is the shroud of a mysterious past, but the intrigue of Ultron is pretty much directly opposite of that.

Sure it would. And you're talking about approaching the story in reverse order, a strategy that is guaranteed to fail. A robot that supposedly *already* exists (even though there's been exactly zero hint of it in any of the current Marvel films), even before IM3 releases this year; becomes the Big Bad in Avengers 2; and then you go back and cover its origin story in Ant-Man --- after it's already been defeated/concluded in the Avengers sequel....? Who's going to give two ****s about seeing the origin story of a villain that's already dead?

Quote:

Originally Posted by VictorShade

I agree,......buuutttt, as we all know, Ultron is never 'truly' dead. He always has contingency plans to ensure his survival.
One of his groovier traits!

exactly, but not necessarily a robot. Like, he could just be an ai, idk, we'll see.

Sure. But that's not the point. The point is that Ultron's origin is incredibly essential to his status as a villain. To skip over that and make him the Avengers 2 villain makes him less compelling, and then to revisit it in a prequel-ish Ant-Man seems like an afterthought. Prequels can work when part of the intrigue of the villain is the shroud of a mysterious past, but the intrigue of Ultron is pretty much directly opposite of that.

I think Ultron being created out of JARVIS would be compelling .... it's just that it changes the mythos, so they'd piss off fanboys.

I think Ultron being created out of JARVIS would be compelling .... it's just that it changes the mythos, so they'd piss off fanboys.

The thing is that the character of Hank Pym himself has become so greatly informed by Ultron (the characters inform each other) that to change the mythos and extract Ultron from his connection to Pym would be to render Pym an even weaker character. I suppose it would make sense if Wright is going to focus on Lang, but it would be a pretty big slap to the face of a classic Avengers team founder and long-time member. Character assassination.

It's just Stark who builds Ultron instead of Pym, similar to what they did in Next Avengers. That's all, if they're going to do it. Just leave Ant-Man out of it entirely.

No, just no. The fact is, Ant-Man is getting made and it is going to be set in the MCU so he is going to be the creator of Ultron. Since Pym is almost exclusively defined by his membership in the Avengers and his relationship to Ultron. Without those two things, there is no reason to make the film.

No, just no. The fact is, Ant-Man is getting made and it is going to be set in the MCU so he is going to be the creator of Ultron. Since Pym is almost exclusively defined by his membership in the Avengers and his relationship to Ultron. Without those two things, there is no reason to make the film.

I think Ultron being created out of JARVIS would be compelling .... it's just that it changes the mythos, so they'd piss off fanboys.

I think it is interesting. Different take, but sure

Quote:

Originally Posted by OB12

No, just no. The fact is, Ant-Man is getting made and it is going to be set in the MCU so he is going to be the creator of Ultron. Since Pym is almost exclusively defined by his membership in the Avengers and his relationship to Ultron. Without those two things, there is no reason to make the film.

BTW, Next Avengers sucked.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rock Sexton

Hank Pym or no Hank Pym, there's always a reason to make the film.

See, since ant-man is getting made, it just seems likely/obvious that he will be responsible for Ultron's creation, whenever we see him. Venom is saying leave him out, but the fact ant-man is being made, they might as well go with the ultron's creation staying true to source material. though I agree, the descision to make the film shouldn't way on that lol

No, just no. The fact is, Ant-Man is getting made and it is going to be set in the MCU so he is going to be the creator of Ultron. Since Pym is almost exclusively defined by his membership in the Avengers and his relationship to Ultron. Without those two things, there is no reason to make the film.

People have to keep under consideration that this MCU isn't a literal translation of the comics. They're trying to weave all these things together in such a way that the different pieces fit. It's an entirely different medium and depending on the rest of the cogs in play, it might make more sense from a storytelling perspective that Ultron is somehow birthed from Jarvis.